4.6 Article

The radio to TeV orbital variability of the microquasar LS I+61 303

期刊

ASTRONOMY & ASTROPHYSICS
卷 459, 期 2, 页码 L25-L28

出版社

EDP SCIENCES S A
DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361:20065830

关键词

X-rays : binaries -; stars : winds, outflows; stars : individual : LS I+61 303; radiation mechanisms : non thermal

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Context. The microquasar LS I + 61 303 has recently been detected at TeV energies by the Cherenkov telescope MAGIC, presenting variability on timescales similar to its orbital period. This system has been intensively observed at different wavelengths during the last three decades, showing a very complex behavior along the orbit. Aims. We aim to explain, using a leptonic model in the accretion scenario, the observed orbital variability and spectrum from radio to TeV energies of LS I + 61 303. Methods. We apply a leptonic model based on accretion of matter from the slow inhomogeneous equatorial wind of the primary star, assuming particle injection proportional to the accretion rate. The relativistic electron energy distribution within the binary system is computed taking into account convective/adiabatic and radiative losses. The spectral energy distribution ( SED) has been calculated accounting for synchrotron and ( Thomson/Klein Nishina - KN-) inverse Compton ( IC) processes and the photon-photon absorption in the ambient photon fields. The angle dependence of the photon- photon and IC cross sections has been considered in the calculations. Results. We reproduce the main features of the observed light curves from LS I + 61 303 at radio, X-rays, high-energy ( HE), and very high-energy ( VHE) gamma-rays, and the whole spectral energy distribution. Conclusions. Our model is able to explain the radio to TeV orbital variability taking into account that radiation along the orbit is strongly affected by the variable accretion rate, the magnetic field strength, and by the ambient photon field via dominant IC losses and photon- photon absorption at periastron.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据